On Sunday, the Whampoa Military Academy, founded by the Republic of China in 1924, celebrated its 100th anniversary. Taiwan and China held centennial celebrations, each laying claim to the institution’s lineage.
Several retired Taiwanese military officials accepted the Chinese Central Military Commission’s invitation to participate in commemorative activities in Guangdong, China, a decision that sparked objections and heated debate in Taiwan. Those officials are walking a fine line; any misstep could see them wading into the dangerous waters of treason by collaborating with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), far beyond mere cognitive warfare and “united front” tactics.
For those who hold the academy in high esteem, invoking the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (兩岸人民關係條例) and National Security regulations, imposing constraints on these veterans is not only disrespectful, but also dismissive of their service. After all, they say, these veterans are no ordinary people; they attended military academies from childhood, trained to become professional soldiers and rose to the rank of general.
Then again, following pension reforms, they ended up with more favorable pensions than civil servants. It is no exaggeration to say that they live well off of taxpayers’ hard-earned money. The state gives them this preferential treatment for defending the country and their loyalty. Even after returning to civilian life, it is only right that they uphold a high sense of duty and integrity, and identify with the country.
Based on these minimal standards, former premier Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村) serves as a relevant point of comparison. Born in China, he became a military strongman in Taiwan. He represented a generational shift, and no Whampoa graduate can claim to match his standards, sense of identity and significance.
Although he visited China multiple times and attended events commemorating war, he never once wavered in his beliefs. Hau was a staunch anti-communist, rejecting the legitimacy of the CCP and their self-serving historical narratives.
When visiting the Museum of the War of Chinese People’s Resistance against Japanese Aggression in 2014, he refused the company of Chinese officials. Upon reading the museum’s introduction stating that “the CCP united and guided all ethnic groups across China,” he said that it was Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) who led the eight-year war against the Japanese. On multiple occasions, he corrected biased statements made by the museum guide, demanding they produce the “Declaration of Joint KMT-CCP Cooperation” to set the record straight.
Hau remained loyal to the Republic of China (ROC). Although he advocated peaceful “reunification,” he remained committed to the principle of “constitutional one China,” rooted in Sun Yat-sen’s (孫逸仙) Three Principles of the People (三民主義). Hau categorically rejected surrender, annexation and obliteration.
In 2017, Hau attended a symposium in Nanjing with then-Mainland Affairs Council minister Katharine Chang (張小月) and Veterans Affairs Council Deputy Minister Lee Wen-chung (李文忠).
According to Lee, Hau made three promises in confidence: to never enter CCP state bureaus, to never accept the hospitality of CCP officials and to never engage with media criticizing the ROC. He kept his word until the very end.
Hau visited China during the administration of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), of the KMT, and a second time during the administration of former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), of the Democratic Progressive Party. Despite serving under two different ruling parties, Hau remained steadfast in his views, defending the head of the Whampoa Military Academy as well as his own vision for the ROC.
Whampoa graduates today should emulate Hau. His implementation of three principles — no contact, no negotiation and no compromise — was a clear boundary against treason and collaboration with the CCP.
How can the Whampoa officials who chose to forsake these fundamental principles and become instruments of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army face their friends and fellow soldiers at home? Taiwan should not welcome them back.
Tzou Jiing-wen is editor-in-chief of the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper).
Translated by Gabrielle Killick
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its